Should Thor leave the Avengers?

[jpbl1976]

I think it's more fun if they are rivals or even enemies at any particular point. Even though their fight in the Galactus Seed arc was rather dumb, there's always potential for a rather epic story involving both across space.

You bring up an interesting point about having Thor take on cosmic villains. I remember reading somewhere that if you remove Thor from Earth too long, fans can become disconnected since he would lose his humanistic connection. I'll accept this has been a dilemma about Thor as a character. However one of my main problems since the JMS revival is that Asgard should not be on Earth. There is something far more grand about it being in its own realm/universe/dimension. Now Thor and Asgardians have become as ubiquitous as any metahuman walking the Marvel universe.

Actually, I prefer it when Thor and the Surfer are friends -- both are very noble characters and I really thought Marvel editorial did a great disservice to both characters by letting Fraction tell that stupid story of his that had Thor acting like a clod and Norrin Radd acting like an idiot.

Anyway, I think the whole physical proximity of Thor to humanity is overblown as a storytelling concept. I saw some lengthy arguments on other CBR threads but declined to comment because I felt it was all so beside the point.

For the most part, I think location has been used an as excuse for when a writer can't execute the characterization or story very well. Yet, historically, some of the best Thor stories paid little heed to where Thor was. Some happened in space, some happened in one part or another of the other Nine Realms and some happened in New York or Oklahoma.

For example, Simonson's run didn't have Asgard on earth, Thor wasn't on earth all that much and Don Blake was around for around 1 whole issue before getting axed -- but it's generally regarded as the seminal run on the title. In that sense, the whole "Thor needs to be close to humanity and needs to have a human alter ego or he gets uninteresting" is dubious.

Ultimately, I believe that a strong story is a strong story regardless of whether Thor's on Earth, Asgard or somewhere in between. In fact, it's rather interesting that Aaron and Ribic's Thor God of Thunder happens with Thor is three different places: Earth in 9th Century AD, Somewhere Where There Are Dead Gods and Asgard at the End of Times. None of those places puts Thor anywhere near any humans beings that we can relate to (unless, of course, there are folks in the forums who can relate to 9th century Vikings) but I'd argue that it doesn't detract from the story being told in the least.

What's more, looking at other popular comics -- the Sandman had as its main character an entity on a level beyond even... well, pretty much anything... yet it resonated so well with readers precisely because the characters, whether it was Morpheus or Destruction or Death were so... human in their portrayal. That is, Morpheus didn't need a human alter-ego to be a compelling character. What's more, the Sandman stories happened in so many different locales, dreams and planes of existence. In that sense, I don't think its "location, location, location" so much as characterization and good storytelling.

I think a lot of the recent praise for Aaron's Thor (and conversely, the vitriol sent Fraction's way) is that he nails Thor's characterization pretty well (as opposed to Fraction who couldn't seem to tell Thor from a Donkey's behind) and that he tells a good yarn.

Even so, I'd hate to think the formula boils down to something so simplistic -- some stuff just works. The fact is, comic fans are a discerning lot and they know a good story when they read one, storytelling conventions aside.

[Froggy]

We'll see, but i betcha i'm right.

I'll bet you that you're wrong

<_<

what are we betting? sig rights, candy bars, comics?

Hickman isn't here to use Thor as a punching bag and if you read any of his other works you'd know he's the kind of writer to avoid that storytelling tactic.

I mean I know it sucks to see your favorite character lose but in a sequential fiction series these heroes are going to see a lot more wins than losses.

[HaveAtThee]

Actually, I prefer it when Thor and the Surfer are friends -- both are very noble characters and I really thought Marvel editorial did a great disservice to both characters by letting Fraction tell that stupid story of his that had Thor acting like a clod and Norrin Radd acting like an idiot.

Anyway, I think the whole physical proximity of Thor to humanity is overblown as a storytelling concept. I saw some lengthy arguments on other CBR threads but declined to comment because I felt it was all so beside the point.

For the most part, I think location has been used an as excuse for when a writer can't execute the characterization or story very well. Yet, historically, some of the best Thor stories paid little heed to where Thor was. Some happened in space, some happened in one part or another of the other Nine Realms and some happened in New York or Oklahoma.

For example, Simonson's run didn't have Asgard on earth, Thor wasn't on earth all that much and Don Blake was around for around 1 whole issue before getting axed -- but it's generally regarded as the seminal run on the title. In that sense, the whole "Thor needs to be close to humanity and needs to have a human alter ego or he gets uninteresting" is dubious.

Ultimately, I believe that a strong story is a strong story regardless of whether Thor's on Earth, Asgard or somewhere in between. In fact, it's rather interesting that Aaron and Ribic's Thor God of Thunder happens with Thor is three different places: Earth in 9th Century AD, Somewhere Where There Are Dead Gods and Asgard at the End of Times. None of those places puts Thor anywhere near any humans beings that we can relate to (unless, of course, there are folks in the forums who can relate to 9th century Vikings) but I'd argue that it doesn't detract from the story being told in the least.

What's more, looking at other popular comics -- the Sandman had as its main character an entity on a level beyond even... well, pretty much anything... yet it resonated so well with readers precisely because the characters, whether it was Morpheus or Destruction or Death were so... human in their portrayal. That is, Morpheus didn't need a human alter-ego to be a compelling character. What's more, the Sandman stories happened in so many different locales, dreams and planes of existence. In that sense, I don't think its "location, location, location" so much as characterization and good storytelling.

I think a lot of the recent praise for Aaron's Thor (and conversely, the vitriol sent Fraction's way) is that he nails Thor's characterization pretty well (as opposed to Fraction who couldn't seem to tell Thor from a Donkey's behind) and that he tells a good yarn.

Even so, I'd hate to think the formula boils down to something so simplistic -- some stuff just works. The fact is, comic fans are a discerning lot and they know a good story when they read one, storytelling conventions aside.

You make a compelling argument. The Surfer normally is a noble character, much like Thor, and despite both their godlike abilities they both share a level of humility that is sincere. In fact, I do agree that a cosmic adventure with Thor and the Surfer would be a very interesting tale with a lot of fantastic universal elements to it.

I also am of the notion that if you can focus on strong characterization, the setting shouldn't really matter, but I've heard that argument put forth in many places. Marvel's recent history with stories that involve cosmic elements or beings with significant power-levels has been rather spotty. Bendis probably has a lot to do with his, as his Avengers run was hell-bent on "humanizing" the team and focusing a ton on street-level characters.

Yes, Thor is the son of Gaea so he has a strong connection to Earth (and he loved partying there:)), but constantly placing him there (as well as Asgard) devalues his godhood because the characterization alongside this seemingly trivial trait has been sorely lacking up until Jason Aaron was placed on the title. As you've said, locale shouldn't play a major role but it seems that it unfortunately has in recent years. I'm just firm in the belief that Asgard has no business being on Earth. It removes a mystical element about Asgardians in general and also the dimension traveling power that Thor never uses. To me, Asgard being in its own realm/universe/dimension is as much a part of Thor as his hammer is.

[Whirlwind Dinamo]

I have the Simonson Omnibus. I love it!

That run where Asguard was floating above some state in America was good too.

That's J. Michael Straczynski Volumes 1-3 TPB (Graphic Novel Trilogy)

[superchick]

Actually, I prefer it when Thor and the Surfer are friends -- both are very noble characters and I really thought Marvel editorial did a great disservice to both characters by letting Fraction tell that stupid story of his that had Thor acting like a clod and Norrin Radd acting like an idiot.

Anyway, I think the whole physical proximity of Thor to humanity is overblown as a storytelling concept. I saw some lengthy arguments on other CBR threads but declined to comment because I felt it was all so beside the point.

For the most part, I think location has been used an as excuse for when a writer can't execute the characterization or story very well. Yet, historically, some of the best Thor stories paid little heed to where Thor was. Some happened in space, some happened in one part or another of the other Nine Realms and some happened in New York or Oklahoma.

For example, Simonson's run didn't have Asgard on earth, Thor wasn't on earth all that much and Don Blake was around for around 1 whole issue before getting axed -- but it's generally regarded as the seminal run on the title. In that sense, the whole "Thor needs to be close to humanity and needs to have a human alter ego or he gets uninteresting" is dubious.

Ultimately, I believe that a strong story is a strong story regardless of whether Thor's on Earth, Asgard or somewhere in between. In fact, it's rather interesting that Aaron and Ribic's Thor God of Thunder happens with Thor is three different places: Earth in 9th Century AD, Somewhere Where There Are Dead Gods and Asgard at the End of Times. None of those places puts Thor anywhere near any humans beings that we can relate to (unless, of course, there are folks in the forums who can relate to 9th century Vikings) but I'd argue that it doesn't detract from the story being told in the least.

What's more, looking at other popular comics -- the Sandman had as its main character an entity on a level beyond even... well, pretty much anything... yet it resonated so well with readers precisely because the characters, whether it was Morpheus or Destruction or Death were so... human in their portrayal. That is, Morpheus didn't need a human alter-ego to be a compelling character. What's more, the Sandman stories happened in so many different locales, dreams and planes of existence. In that sense, I don't think its "location, location, location" so much as characterization and good storytelling.

I think a lot of the recent praise for Aaron's Thor (and conversely, the vitriol sent Fraction's way) is that he nails Thor's characterization pretty well (as opposed to Fraction who couldn't seem to tell Thor from a Donkey's behind) and that he tells a good yarn.

Even so, I'd hate to think the formula boils down to something so simplistic -- some stuff just works. The fact is, comic fans are a discerning lot and they know a good story when they read one, storytelling conventions aside.

We've had this conversation before. Not everyone is Simonson and Simonson's era is a rarity. In fact I would say it is the only era without Earth being prominent that worked at all.

Fact is, and its this simple, Thor is not just God of Thunder. He is God of the common man and son of Earth. Would you take away the thunder? Of course not so why would you take away the Earth or his connection to humanity? That isn't Thor.

As for Aaron's run, its too soon to judge. Young Thor has great characterisation as a jackass, its marvelous. Contemporary and Future Thor, less so. The plot, is conceptual. What is happening is interesting, but I wouldn't say it was engaging, I can't say I care. Thor won't die unless its Odin!Thor and if he does he'll come back, so what are the stakes?

[SKJoker]

Er, isn't it Iron Man and Captain Marvel that are the Avengers co-captains?

[DiceRoll]

Er, isn't it Iron Man and Captain Marvel that are the Avengers co-captains?

That's what I heard at least.

[HaveAtThee]

We've had this conversation before. Not everyone is Simonson and Simonson's era is a rarity. In fact I would say it is the only era without Earth being prominent that worked at all.

Fact is, and its this simple, Thor is not just God of Thunder. He is God of the common man and son of Earth. Would you take away the thunder? Of course not so why would you take away the Earth or his connection to humanity? That isn't Thor.

As for Aaron's run, its too soon to judge. Young Thor has great characterisation as a jackass, its marvelous. Contemporary and Future Thor, less so. The plot, is conceptual. What is happening is interesting, but I wouldn't say it was engaging, I can't say I care. Thor won't die unless its Odin!Thor and if he does he'll come back, so what are the stakes?

No need to remove Thor from Earth totally, but placing Asgard over Oklahoma and basing an event around its destruction criminally devalue its mystique and overally divinity. It's now just some other place that Iron Man can come fix up if they need. Asgard should be in space, hence its "Realm Eternal" tagline. There are also nine other realms and a plethora of different cultures and characters to explore within Thor's universe. It'd be a bit ridiculous if Thor spent all his time on Earth drinking lattes and flirting with Jane Foster. The point brought up about Simonson's run is that despite Thor's adventures taking place mostly away from Earth it was a highly successful and critically lauded run that has come to be looked upon as legendary (by and large).

As for Aaron's run, his characterization is what has been fantastic as well as his focus on conceptual storylines. He seems to "get" Thor.